LORD KELVINS VIEWS 209 



For myself, I may be permitted here to say that 

 1 have never shared this feeling of indifference and 

 unconcern. As far back as the year 1868, only a 

 month after Lord Kelvin's first presentation of his 

 threefold argument in favour of limiting the age of 

 the earth, I gave in my adhesion to the propriety of 

 restricting the geological demands for time. 1 then 

 showed that even the phenomena of denudation, which, 

 from the time of Hutton downwards, had been most 

 constantly and confidently appealed to in support of the 

 inconceivably vast antiquity of our globe, might be 

 accounted for, at the present rate of action, within 

 such a period as 100 millions of years. 1 To my 

 mind it has always seemed that whatever tends to 

 give more precision to the chronology of the geologist, 

 and helps him to a clearer conception of the antiquity 

 with which he has to deal, ought to be welcomed by 

 him as a valuable assistance in his inquiries. And I 

 feel sure that this view of the matter has now become 

 general among those engaged in geological research. 

 Frank recognition is made of the influence which Lord 

 Kelvin's persistent attacks have had upon our science. 

 Geologists have been led by his criticisms to revise 

 their chronology. They gratefully acknowledge that 

 to him they owe the introduction of important new 

 lines of investigation, which link the solution of the 

 problems of geology with those of physics. They 

 realise how much he has done to dissipate the former 

 vague conceptions as to the duration of geological 



1 Trans. Geo/. Soc. Glasgow^ vol. iii. (March 26, 1868), p. 189. Sir 

 W. Thomson acknowledged my adhesion in his reply to Huxley's 

 criticism. Op. cit., p. 221. 



o 



